It gave a somewhat passive-aggressive response to your pedantic peeve,
Harry. See below. The line about editors almost made me laugh.

In standard English usage, *“data” can be either plural or singular*,
depending on the style guide and context.

   -

   *Plural (traditional, academic/scientific, Latin-derived):* “The data
   *are* incompatible.”
   -

   *Singular (common in general and business English, treating “data” as a
   mass noun like “information”):* “The data *is* incompatible.”

Both are defensible. If you want to be maximally traditional/formal in
scientific prose, use *“are.”* If you want modern general usage, *“is”* is
fine.

A small nuance: in your specific sentence, many editors would also prefer *“the
data are incompatible with the constraints”* or *“the given values are
incompatible”* to avoid any debate.

On Sun, 25 Jan 2026 at 15:03, Harry Powell <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi
>
> “...However, that data are incompatible…”
>
> For pedants like me, it should be “…those data are incompatible…", and for
> people who consider “data" to be singular it should be “…that data is
> incompatible…”. Talk about mangling things…
>
> Harry
>
> On 25 Jan 2026, at 19:28, Eugene Valkov <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Just pasted your problem into ChatGPT 5.2, Thinking mode. This is the
> answer it gave:
>
> <Screenshot 2026-01-25 at 2.25.45 PM.png>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2026 at 11:16, Ian Tickle <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Try this one: A right-angled triangle has base length 10 and height 6
>> measured from the hypotenuse to the opposite apex (the base is the
>> hypotenuse). What's the area of the triangle?
>>
>> ChatGPT says:
>>
>> For any triangle (right-angled or not), the area is:
>>
>> Area = 1/2 base × height
>>
>> So the answer is 10 × 6 / 2 = 30.
>>
>> Wrong!  It's a nasty catch. It goes awry at the very first statement: the
>> expression given is true for some triangles but not all, and in particular
>> not this one.  In fact it's not even a triangle so the area is undefined:
>> that's the correct answer.  It's impossible for the height to be more than
>> 5 (draw the circumscribing circle).  It fell into the trap of unthinking
>> application of a standard formula fetched from the web without determining
>> first whether it applies to the situation (and I imagine most humans will
>> say 30 too without thinking!).
>>
>> This was a question in a job interview at Google.
>>
>> -- Ian
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 25 Jan 2026, 15:31 Goldman, Adrian, <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I think it really depends on use case. It’s extremely good at removing
>>> english language mistakes, for instance. But at heart it’s a statistical
>>> model, right?  What word is likely to follow ‘what’ in a sentence about
>>> ChatGPT, for instance. Like my last.  The likelihood of painterly is very
>>> close to zero, but is, word, token have all got high probabilities. So for
>>> things it should be good at - it really is good.
>>>
>>> That doesn’t include facts: the intersection of words with the world.
>>>
>>> chatgpt5 does facts slightly better than chatgpt2. I remember asking it
>>> for sonnets and 2 hadn’t got a concept of sonnet - but 3+ do. You’ll get 14
>>> lines in one of the classic sonnet rhyme patterns in iambic pentameter.
>>>
>>> But don’t worry it’s going to take over the world. Sam Altman says so.
>>>
>>> [image: 4992.jpg]
>>>
>>> Sam Altman’s make-or-break year: can the OpenAI CEO cash in his bet on
>>> the future?
>>> <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-interactive/2026/jan/25/sam-altman-openai>
>>> theguardian.com
>>> <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-interactive/2026/jan/25/sam-altman-openai>
>>>
>>> <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-interactive/2026/jan/25/sam-altman-openai>
>>>
>>> You know the real problem with the enshitification of the internet is
>>> legal liability. If meta, OpenAI, Google, TikTok, x etc had the same legal
>>> liabilities as publishers, they would stop producing and distributing crap
>>> because otherwise they would be sued out of existence.
>>>
>>> Adrian
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On 25 Jan 2026, at 16:24, Harry Powell <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>  I read this yesterday -
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/24/latest-chatgpt-model-uses-elon-musks-grokipedia-as-source-tests-reveal
>>>
>>> And this (and similar articles) a while back -
>>>
>>> https://grokipediawiki.com/analysis/plagiarism-scandal-investigation/
>>>
>>> These don’t inspire me to use either.
>>>
>>> Harry
>>>
>>> On 25 Jan 2026, at 13:17, Hughes, Jon <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> hi,
>>> there has been much talk of using AI to write code for us and of it
>>> making the world better. people in this group have their own opinions
>>> regarding alphafold, for example, but at a much simpler level, i just asked
>>> chatGTP something about electrical power generation: his/her/their answer
>>> finally included, ""Interpretation per joule: 4–12 €cents per kWh equals
>>> 4–12 × 10⁻⁶ € per joule, since 1 kWh = 3.6 MJ". well, we all make mistakes,
>>> right?!
>>> cheers,
>>> jon
>>>
>>>
>>> ########################################################################
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
>>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>>>
>>> This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a
>>> mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are
>>> available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
>>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
>>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list 
hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at 
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/

Reply via email to